Fedora 11 Alpha questions, and Linux distro choice

[gkweb]

Hello,

Since Linus told us he was using Fedora, I wanted to take a look at it. Immediately I checked Wilders forum, and as expected I found your great test Mrkvonic ;)
http://www.wilderssecurity.com/showthread.php?t=224229&highlight=fedora

Mrkvonic, I was wondering if you plan to test the lastly released Fedora 11 ALPHA 64 bits ? I known it is alpha, not even beta, but your tests are always well done, and concrete tests such as NVIDIA drivers/codecs/updates are truly interesting :)

Of course I'm downloading the LiveCD just to see it, but I'm sure some people would be interested by your test. Unless of course you prefer to wait for the final release, which would be understandable !

Also, as a bonus question, which Linux distro fits better, in your opinion and experience, the following points in order of importance :
1 - stability
2 - solid updates management (automatic, robust, handle well dependencies)
3 - good video card driver support (NVIDIA/ATI), and other drivers
4 - follows lastest software/technologies (e.g : ext4/OpenOffice 3.0)

I see Ubuntu that I'm using, except I'm not sure that ext4 will be the default for the next Jaunty release, whereas I'm sure it is for Fedora 11 (it is by default in the 11 alpha). Regarding updates management I have read Fedora is good at it. For security related software, I know OpenSUSE includes AppArmor while others include SELinux, or simply nothing. That's just a bonus.

Ubuntu is working well at the moment and I liked the fact it offered me directly a popup with a choice between two NVIDIA drivers :) However there is so much Linux distro to try... hmmm... hard to choose !

Of course everyone can share his experience on this subject.

Regards,
gkweb.

[Kerodo]

After years of distro hopping and fooling around, I have in the end settled on Ubuntu x64 myself. Fedora is nice, and I like it a lot, but it, like most others, does require some tweaking to get everything set up and working. Ubuntu, for me anyway, is the only distro that can pull me away from Windows now. There is nothing easier.

But half the fun, though, is trying each and every one of the others out and seeing which one speaks to you. :thumb:

[Mrkvonic]

Hello,

As to testing, I usually refrain from testing alphas. Now, my "test" machines are 32-bit, except one laptop, my production machines are 64-bit. I never test on production machines, so this leaves the single laptop as scapegoat. But I will wait for beta.

As to your questions:

1. Stability - CentOS.
2. Updates - any Debian based, Ubuntu in the lead.
3. Graphics support - Ubuntu.
4. Latest and greatest - I'm conservative, I prefer stability - Fedora & openSUSE, in my opinion.

So, it comes down to CentOS for "server" work, Ubuntu for "home" work, mainly, although other distros, including SUSE play a part.

Combined, Ubuntu is truly the simplest, most complete home distro ... Linux Mint also makes a great choice. There are many other nice distros, but most are developed by 1-2-man teams, so the question is what about long-term commitment.

I hope this helps ...

All of the above strictly home and soho, not corporate / enterprise needs ...

Cheers,
Mrk

[gkweb]

Hello,

Thank you very much for your answers.

That is what I like in Ubuntu, the fact that most things are automated or already done, there is few needed manual tweaking. If Fedora requires more manual tweaking, that's definitely a bad point for me. Not that I wouldn't be able to do it, but I simply want an easy to use distro for home use.

Yes Mrkvonic, I was talking about home use, I forgot to point it out. Your comments are very welcome, thanks. Graphic support is vital for me, so I guess it's Ubuntu all the way for me. I'll try the LiveCD of Fedora 11 alpha just to see.

As you say Kerodo, testing other distro is half the fun, that's also why reading Mrkvonic's website is a lot of fun packed into one place !
For home use I have tested OpenSUSE, Kubuntu/Ubuntu, and whill check soon Fedora (alpha) to grab a bit of fun by myself too :)

Regards,
gkweb.

[lodore]

Hello,
btw fedora 11 alpha just like any alpha is horrible. i tryed it a few days ago. the anaconda installer in the alpha is major slow and so is the installed system. i would try fedora 10 and wait for 11 beta if i was you.
I found fedora 10 easy enough to setup.

below is some fedora guides
fedora 10 nvidia driver guide (http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showpost.php?p=1114769&postcount=1)
Fedora Guide/howto's for F10 (http://www.fedoraguide.info/index.php?title=Main_Page)
compiz-fusion-0.7.9 repo (http://forums.fedoraforum.org/showthread.php?t=173317)
Fedora 11 rawhide nvidia guide (http://fedoraforum.org/forum/showthread.php?t=211626)
all these guides are created by leigh123@linux at the fedora forum.

the links below are what i used
howtoforge (http://www.howtoforge.com/the-perfect-desktop-fedora-10)

[rdsu]

gkweb,

I don't know if is "so" stable as you want or need, but you can try sidux (http://www.sidux.com), and see its speed, security, lastest packages, hardware support, etc...

Regards

[tlu]

If it comes to chosing a distro one aspect might also be dependency resolution of the used package management.

I must admit that I'm used to (K)Ubuntu and haven't thoroughly tried other distros for quite some time. But I know that many people think that dependency resolution on Debian based distros using dpkg/APT/deb is superior to, e.g., RPM. This was at least the situation some years ago. I don't know if this has changed since then.

Perhaps somebody else (Mrk?) can shed some light on this issue..?

[FastGame]

-{ Quote: "If it comes to chosing a distro one aspect might also be dependency resolution of the used package management.

I must admit that I'm used to (K)Ubuntu and haven't thoroughly tried other distros for quite some time. But I know that many people think that dependency resolution on Debian based distros using dpkg/APT/deb is superior to, e.g., RPM. This was at least the situation some years ago. I don't know if this has changed since then.

Perhaps somebody else (Mrk?) can shed some light on this issue..?" }-

There is no issue today, RPM is very reliable.

BTW, Ubuntu holds no edge what so ever in the area of "Graphics support" among mainstream Distro's, or some not so mainstream........

[Mrkvonic]

-{ Quote: "If it comes to chosing a distro one aspect might also be dependency resolution of the used package management.

I must admit that I'm used to (K)Ubuntu and haven't thoroughly tried other distros for quite some time. But I know that many people think that dependency resolution on Debian based distros using dpkg/APT/deb is superior to, e.g., RPM. This was at least the situation some years ago. I don't know if this has changed since then.

Perhaps somebody else (Mrk?) can shed some light on this issue..?" }-

It's difficult to assess the really borderline cases, but overall, I think / feel that this is the case. This is nothing scientific or exact ... overall experience of years working with package managers. The apt-get simply wins. But when it's used on rpm-based distro, it still is as good, only this rarely happens.

Mrk

[NGRhodes]

Stability - Centos/Red hat (use RH at work) and Debian.
Solid updates management - Any Debian based distro.
Video card - Cant answer as use integrated intel gfx.
Latest - IMO Arch Linux is great for the obsessive-compulsive hobbyist. For those who want some spare time to get some real work done I would say Fedora.

Would say OpenSuse seems to be more up to date than Ubuntu, but the stability is not as good, a few years ago I suffered glitch after glitch with Yast and also at the time it did not do dependency resolution of non repo packages - I dunno how much better it is now.

Ext4 will not be default in Ubuntu, there is no stable version of Grub that supports booting from Ext4 yet. I always run a boot partition so I will be using Ext4 in its Ext3 compatible mode (does not alter file structure, just uses improved functionality).

My experience of Fedora was that there was an aweful lot of updates initially then it settled down after a few months. Be warned that Fedora does install major software updates between versions, which Ubuntu will not do (though you can add extra repositories eg in the case of Open Office 3).

People are quite right when they say there is nothing between deb and rpm, but what sets Debian (and its derivatives apart) is that the quality of the repositories is very good, that is in how well its managed, naming conventions, use of configuration tools, quality control of packages etc.

Been a few years since I played with Linux security modules, but I got tired of various GRSec errors as GDM loaded.
When I looked at App Armour it seemed far more desktop user friendly to configure than SELinux, but they are still IMO very much expert only tools at the moment.

Cheers, Nick.

[Kerodo]

Speaking of Ext4, what are the planned benefits of it and/or new features? Anyone here up on the latest in that area?

[NGRhodes]

-{ Quote: "Speaking of Ext4, what are the planned benefits of it and/or new features? Anyone here up on the latest in that area?" }-

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext4 has a good list of new features.

[Kerodo]

-{ Quote: "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext4 has a good list of new features." }-
Thanks... I need to read up on this.... :thumb:

[gkweb]

Hello,

The fact that Ubuntu does not do major software updates between two versions is a warranty of stability, which is an advantage in my opinion. Still, has it has been said, for a given software like OpenOffice you can add the specific repository for it. If on Fedora a software could suddenly breaks up after an update, that is not what I'm looking for (I'm not saying Fedora is bad, I'm just comparing both distro to my needs).

Also, I've read the aforementioned link about installing Nvidia drivers on Fedora, and it involves two small commands line, but compared to Ubuntu, I was able to click on a link on their documentation page about nvidia, and it installed everything automatically. That's not a blocking point at all, I could perfectly install the drivers on Fedora, it was just to add arguments for choosing one or the other.

About this point, as I'm talking about it, Ubuntu 8.10 was offering in GNOME (System -> Admin -> Drivers) only the Nvidia drivers v173 and v177. As I installed from their site (apt link) the 180.11 version, will the driver be disabled if a kernel update occurs ? Will Ubuntu checks for updates for it ?

That's not enough to keep me away of Fedora, just saying. So at the end, what could differentiate them, is in one hand their package manager, and in the other hand the number of steps needed to install some drivers/software. I've also read about speed issue, Fedora supposed to be slower than Ubuntu, but I cannot tell.

All in all, Ubuntu seems to truly fit my needs, but I'm open to test Fedora 11 to check when it will be released. In the meantime, I will run the alpha in VirtualBox to see what I could like or not in it (keeping in mind it's an alpha obviously!).

Ext4 seems interesting, as it is supposed to be faster, but is it really fully reliable for production use ? I'm wondering.

Regards,
gkweb.

[rdsu]

-{ Quote: "The fact that Ubuntu does not do major software updates between two versions is a warranty of stability, which is an advantage in my opinion. Still, has it has been said, for a given software like OpenOffice you can add the specific repository for it. If on Fedora a software could suddenly breaks up after an update, that is not what I'm looking for (I'm not saying Fedora is bad, I'm just comparing both distro to my needs). " }-
Did you saw my post!?

[gkweb]

-{ Quote: "Did you saw my post!?" }-

I did, but apparently sidux does not directly support proprietary Nvidia drivers :
http://manual.sidux.com/en/hw-dev-hw-dri-en.htm
http://www.nvidia.fr/object/linux_display_amd64_180.22_fr.html

That would mean downloading sources from nvidia as well as recompiling the kernel manually, and doing that every time the kernel is updated.

If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me of course, as I do not know sidux.

Regards,
gkweb.

[Pedro]

That's why i think things changed. If i would buy one, i'd get ATI. Free drivers in addition to fglrx (proprietary).
I use the free one here, but for more recent cards, fglrx may be the only choice.

[lodore]

Hey GKweb,
If you add the rpmfusion repo and use the commands listed at there website (http://rpmfusion.org/RPMFusionSwitcher)
It will automatically offer you the lastest nvidia driver once it becomes avaliable.
when the last kernal came out i had to wait roughly 24hours before the new nvidia driver came out.
I just used the older kernal for a day.
What you could do is wait a few days before you do the updates which would avoid that problem.
once the driver has successfully installed reboot.
at thenext start the small python script will configure the nvidia driver for you.
but tbh if your hapy with ubuntu stick with it.
fedora is definatly more bleeding edge and you will need to reinstall it roughly once a year.

[rdsu]

-{ Quote: "I did, but apparently sidux does not directly support proprietary Nvidia drivers :
http://manual.sidux.com/en/hw-dev-hw-dri-en.htm
http://www.nvidia.fr/object/linux_display_amd64_180.22_fr.html

That would mean downloading sources from nvidia as well as recompiling the kernel manually, and doing that every time the kernel is updated.

If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me of course, as I do not know sidux." }-
Can you try to use the Open Source Xorg drivers? :)

http://manual.sidux.com/en/hw-dev-hw-dri-en.htm#native-nv-ati

[gkweb]

Thanks Lodore for your valuable information, I'll definitely test Fedora, probably the v10 as you suggested to do a fair comparison with Ubuntu v8.10 :) That's the better way to check if it speaks to me more or less than Ubuntu ;)

Ubuntu is great, but what is even more great in the Linux world is that I'm able to test any other distro for free. I hope to be able to test it in VirtualBox this week.
(I don't forget sidux, but I doubt the Open Source drivers are as fast as the proprietary ones).

Regards,
gkweb.

[rdsu]

-{ Quote: "fedora is definatly more bleeding edge and you will need to reinstall it roughly once a year." }-
Fortunately, exists rolling distros to avoid this...

[gkweb]

Why Fedora must be reinstalled once a year ? Does older releases become unsupported as soon as a new version is released ?

Regarding security, I found the follwing :
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Security/Features

- PolicyKit
- SELinux
- No eXecute (NX)
- Position Independent Executables (PIE)
- Compile Time Buffer Checks (FORTIFY_SOURCE)
- ELF (Executable and Linkable Format) Data Hardening
- Restricted Kernel Memory Access
- Stack Smash Protection, Buffer Overflow Detection, and Variable Reordering

There is thus some memory protection against buffer overflows. Not that they cannot happen anymore, but it's much more difficult for an attacker, and there is no need to install GRSecurity to have them.

I don't remember having read similar hardening in Ubuntu, which is still secure by the way, just thinking that the above is a nice bonus.

EDIT : the server version of Ubuntu does, but I'm not sure for the desktop version : http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/serveredition/features/security

Regards,
gkweb.

[lodore]

Hey GKweb,
your welcome.
you dont need to reinstall once a year.
you get updates for quite awhile.
tell me how it goes and how you think it compares to ubuntu.

[NGRhodes]

Fedora gives 13 months of support per release, in comparision Ubuntu offers 18 months (or 3 years for long term support versions). IMO 13 months is enough for the regular upgrader.

[Ocky]

-{ Quote: "
I don't remember having read similar hardening in Ubuntu, which is still secure by the way, just thinking that the above is a nice bonus.

EDIT : the server version of Ubuntu does, but I'm not sure for the desktop version : http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu/serveredition/features/security

Regards,
gkweb." }-

Have a look at Bastille Bastille Unix (http://www.bastille-unix.org/) for hardening Linux. Also Ubuntu desktop comes with AppArmor
Secure Ubuntu (http://beginlinux.com/desktop_training/ubuntu/1107-secure-ubuntu) - similar to SELinux.

I am trying CentOS 5.2 in VirtualBox and so far am very pleased. It has support till end March 2014 .. i.e. don't need to constantly update to get
the latest cutting edge stuff. The rpmforge repo is very useful. I have found it very stable - there is less eyecandy than Ubuntu, but with some themes
and icons it can be very nice.
Bastille for Ubuntu ..https://help.ubuntu.com/community/BastilleLinux

Regards.

[gkweb]

Hello,

I am in the process of installing Fedora on another HDD than Ubuntu, and dual boot between them. Installing Nvidia driver in VirtualBox was a mess (X was not starting anymore). I remember to have encountered such problem with Ubuntu as well, when virtualized some things won't work.

Coincidently, at work we are thinking about having an homogeneous Linux server pool, instead of actually various distro as well as OpenBSD. It won't be started tomorrow, but I will keep en eye on CentOS and Fedora. Co-workers really want the GUI installed and started, guess I'll either have to fight them to death (just kiding!) or accept it :)

I have read about Bastille for Ubuntu, but while it could be worthwhile, it is not natively included and handled by Ubuntu apparently, and I don't know if the stability would be affected or not. Something to test, but I cannot test everything at once ;)

Regards,
gkweb.

[lewmur]

-{ Quote: "Hello,

I am in the process of installing Fedora on another HDD than Ubuntu, and dual boot between them. Installing Nvidia driver in VirtualBox was a mess (X was not starting anymore). I remember to have encountered such problem with Ubuntu as well, when virtualized some things won't work.

Coincidently, at work we are thinking about having an homogeneous Linux server pool, instead of actually various distro as well as OpenBSD. It won't be started tomorrow, but I will keep en eye on CentOS and Fedora. Co-workers really want the GUI installed and started, guess I'll either have to fight them to death (just kiding!) or accept it :)

I have read about Bastille for Ubuntu, but while it could be worthwhile, it is not natively included and handled by Ubuntu apparently, and I don't know if the stability would be affected or not. Something to test, but I cannot test everything at once ;)

Regards,
gkweb." }-
No hardware driver will work in a virtual environment. The host system ALWAYS controls the hardware. That doesn't mean the visual effects won't work but you'll need the Guest Additions, if you are using Vbox, for that.

But as a general rule, no virtual guest has any control over hardware. It makes no difference what Video card your computer has, the guest OS sees a "virtual card" provided by the virtual software.

You might as well be trying to use nVidia drivers with an ATI card.

[gkweb]

Thanks for the information, I should have read Mrk's guide more.

Posting this from Fedora. It takes much more time to setup the same things (just installed Truecrypt and Keepass only...). I will keep you informed.

Regards,
gkweb.

[Longboard]

"lo
While were on Fedora: can anyone fix the choppy Flash play in Fedora (and for that matter SUSe) on VMware ??
Both install great; then fiddle fiddle..:P

just a little precis:
@gkweb
As a very basic end user who is prepared to do some cli work and does not need server set-ups, dont really care re desktop pizazz ( although liking Oz-Os interface :) ): e-mail vids, some music, office stuff, browsing: BASIC:

The CentOs gui is plain and useable, as a desktop: system is rock solid and stable for me. In fact a bit boring ;D
Those guys do a great job.
The remodelling of the great Redhat implies a long life for CentOs releases to come.
Cutting edge and fiddling aint really my idea of fun.
I can do all I want in CentOs and as an option with 'extensions' as required

Apart from the "Ubuntu base type" (Mint, Xubuntu ; i know Deb base) distros I'm a little tired of constant tweaks required to make some of the "cutting edge" distros meet my needs on a desktop.
I've tried Sidux and Debian but just find too much required and atm I'm not up to it.
Gentoo:way too tricky for me atm.
Mepis fits the needs but some turmoil recently: now possibly resolved for WW as new release nearly ready.
PCLOS updated now: still a great desktop system and new '2009' on the blocks.
Got tired of dependency issues in Slack ergo: Wolvix :) Still have no issues with Wolvix 1.1; as a two man operation expectations cannot be too high re new release schedule and packages, but coming..
Vector: very nice.
Zenwalk another great customised slackware option.

Mandriva 2009 has been good to me, some signs of renovations underway with biz model.

Really wanted to get along with PCBSD and DesktopBSd but required too much input and cannot get some basic utilities set-up.

Arch i liked from scratch but got a bit lost in: LOL even with the wiki :wacko: , have high hopes for chakra project but maybe loonngg way to go there.

Absolute as a niche release : nice

Plenty of scope there without too much configing
Be interesting to see where/how the latest devt of "auto xorg.config" without xorg file goes/takes us.

Nothing really new from me :blink:

Edit: interesting how centOs as a desktop pops up more often; go Ocky :thumb:

[Longboard]

Something new ;) :
I've revisited SuSE 11 as a desktop and found it to be very satisfactory indeed.
Fwiw; there seems to be some inceasing momentum behind SuSE.
Comments ?

[Kerodo]

SuSE 11 is very nice, it's probably my #2 or #3 pick after Ubuntu. It took a tweak or two more than Ubuntu for me, but it wasn't hard at all, in fact, it's pretty easy to set up overall. Has a nice polished look n feel IMO. I prefer the KDE desktop in this one.

I don't know about momentum, or whether it can challenge Ubuntu, but it's right up there at the top IMO.

[gkweb]

Hello,

Below is my experience on Fedora 10 64bits after 7 days of daily usage.

Issues encountered (all fixed)
- black grub screen
- desktop effect cannot be enabled (nvidia driver correctly installed)
- truecrypt was a pain to compile, no Fedora package available, lot of dependencies
- Evolution mail client provided without the anti-spam bogofilter plugin by default (unlike Ubuntu)
- Compiz very slow when 3D windows effect enabled (not fixed)
- PulseAudio nightmare, sound crakling (spent hours on trying many solutions)
- default NetworkManager interface couldn't be modified or disabled/deleted (DHCP searching for a long time before giving up and starting my added connection)
- Screenlets hard to find, had to rely on an unofficial repository found on the english forum from one of the mods or admin
- by default, America's Army game slower than in Ubuntu, but might be the driver being different (180.25)

To sume it up, a lot more manual fixes and tweaking were required compared to Ubuntu. That was expected, but the PulseAudio issue really got me aggravated.

However, now that eveything is configured, I really enjoy using it :)
I like the default extra security and am learning SELinux to see what I can do with Firefox, if I can play a little with it.

The update manager is nice, you can only apply security fixes and not add corrective packages, can be usefull for a server for instance. I'm considering testing Fedora 10 on a server, which would not require all of these manual tweaking (no need to play movies or games, or to surf the web).

I've successfully backed it up on another HDD by booting on my Acronis TrueImage 2009 boot CD.

At the end, all I can say is that in my opinion, Fedora is not meant for beginners, as many things have to be done in command line. While I really like it, I find Ubuntu far easier to use. Both distro are very great, but despite the issues encountered, I don't know why but my heart seems to go more toward Fedora :) (the booting animated solar theme is beautiful :D)

Regards,
gkweb.

[Longboard]

-{ Quote: "PulseAudio issue really got me aggravated." }-
You're not alone >:(
BIG BIG P-I-T-A
Enough reason to wipe Fedora for me as simple end user.
Sort of a shame :-\ , I too liked some of the finer config options, but life is too short..and other great options available :D

[Kerodo]

-{ Quote: "
At the end, all I can say is that in my opinion, Fedora is not meant for beginners, as many things have to be done in command line. While I really like it, I find Ubuntu far easier to use. Both distro are very great, but despite the issues encountered, I don't know why but my heart seems to go more toward Fedora :) (the booting animated solar theme is beautiful :D)

Regards,
gkweb." }-
Wow, all I can say is, you have a lot more patience than I nowadays.... But good show, after all that work you are then rewarded with a nice system. :thumb:

[Arup]

I will repeat at the cost of being redundant, Ubuntu today is the Windows of Linux world, it may not be the fastest or cutting edge but it works out of the box, is supported quite well, is patched fast and is quite stable as well with minimal issues present out of the box. Its also easy to install and upgrade and can be customized well. Fedora has come a long way and today its far more friendlier and less hard core but still has a long way to go before it comes close to Ubuntu's overall friendliness.

[Longboard]

-{ Quote: "Ubuntu today is the Windows of Linux world" }-
:o
:o
You'll upset everybody...
:D
:D
But: it is an accurate observation of current circumstances: start with the Interesting Interlopers: like what you see: get really interested: do the rounds of other distros: find limitations re time, effort, and patience: get dragged back for the righteous oob experience with all the new gained knowledge and confidence.
Can always go back or forward on the circle of Linux. :)
:thumb:

[Arup]

-{ Quote: ":o
:o
You'll upset everybody...
:D
:D
But: it is an accurate observation of current circumstances: start with the Interesting Interlopers: like what you see: get really interested: do the rounds of other distros: find limitations re time, effort, and patience: get dragged back for the righteous oob experience with all the new gained knowledge and confidence.
Can always go back or forward on the circle of Linux. :)
:thumb:" }-


:)

I am well aware of that but its the same Linux purists who have been hindering the popularity of Linux distros among Windows user. If you make it cutting edge and hardcore, I got news for them, Linux will cease to exist and only those who like CLI will be able to run Linux. That certainly would not be good for those who are tired of paying high cost of software and hardware upgrades, viruses, spywares etc. AV, HIPS and would like to switch to Linux for peace of mind. Distros like SuSE, Ubuntu, PCLOS, MEPIS, Sidux etc as well as Sabayon have made many Windows user endear themselves to Linux and we have to thank them for that. Of course, for purists Linux will continue having hardcore choices of Mandriva, Gentoo, Debian etc. and they can customize it and run any way they like it. Thats the beauty of Linux, they have one to suit every state of mind.

[lewmur]

-{ Quote: "I will repeat at the cost of being redundant, Ubuntu today is the Windows of Linux world, it may not be the fastest or cutting edge but it works out of the box, is supported quite well, is patched fast and is quite stable as well with minimal issues present out of the box. Its also easy to install and upgrade and can be customized well. Fedora has come a long way and today its far more friendlier and less hard core but still has a long way to go before it comes close to Ubuntu's overall friendliness." }-
Super Ubuntu is even better IMO.

[lewmur]

-{ Quote: ":)

I am well aware of that but its the same Linux purists who have been hindering the popularity of Linux distros among Windows user. " }-
I will agree with that whole-heartedly. The real joy of Linux is its diversity. If you want to be a "purist" who uses the CLI routinely, then choose a distro that you can 'tweak" till your heart's content. But for those who just want to get out from under MS's thumb there are distros that don't require use of the CLI at all once the system is setup. And very little CLI to get them setup.

For the "purist" to belittle those users is harmful to the overall Linux community.

[Arup]

-{ Quote: "Super Ubuntu is even better IMO." }-


It is and I wholeheartedly recommend it to all first timers but sadly, there is no x64 edition out yet.

[lewmur]

-{ Quote: "It is and I wholeheartedly recommend it to all first timers but sadly, there is no x64 edition out yet." }-Would first timers even know the difference? I've have run 64bit and 32bit versions of 8.10 and really couldn't see any significant difference except that 64 tends to have more compatibility issues.

[zapjb]

A couple months ago I tried the top 6 (DistroWatch) that had Live CDs.

The only one that recognized my wireless OOTB was OpenSUSE.

Thats what I dual booted on my Vista laptop. I was never able to sort out the choppy video playback. Seems there are no good Linux drivers for an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2600. In fact thats what messed up my OpenSUSE install. Me mucking about & trying to install some other drivers. Finally just wiped it & am licking my wounds.

So does anybody know of a distro with a LiveCD that works well OOTB with my Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN & has good drivers (no choppy playback) for my ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2600?

[Kerodo]

-{ Quote: "
So does anybody know of a distro with a LiveCD that works well OOTB with my Intel(R) Wireless WiFi Link 4965AGN & has good drivers (no choppy playback) for my ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2600?" }-
Your best bet on the ATI drivers is to get them off the ATI site and install manually. That's what I do, and it always works best. I see there are ATI drivers for the ATI Radeon HD 2600, if that's what you have. But I don't see the 2600 in the Mobility section.

Some things may not work on the live cd, but when installed, you can add your own drivers as needed, where you can't on a live cd.

[zapjb]

That's the problem. AFAIK there are no drivers for my specific Graphics that will deliver a seamless nonchoppy playback of videos in Linux.

[Kerodo]

-{ Quote: "That's the problem. AFAIK there are no drivers for my specific Graphics that will deliver a seamless nonchoppy playback of videos in Linux." }-
My experience with Linux video tells me that it's a bit choppy no matter what you do.... compared to Win anyway... but I do get pretty good results now with the ATI drivers I use.

[Arup]

I have a ATI4850 dual GPU card and I always use ATI drivers from their site and not repos, I never have any choppy playback issues, infact, full screen movies play better than my Windows installation. I don't do games so can't say anything but in terms of video loading and playback, Ubuntu is excellent.

[Kerodo]

Actually, in Linux I don't think it has anything to do with the graphics drivers, I think it's more a case of bad streaming and/or bad codecs...

[Arup]

-{ Quote: "Actually, in Linux I don't think it has anything to do with the graphics drivers, I think it's more a case of bad streaming and/or bad codecs..." }-

Very true, there have been some flaky graphics driver in the past but the latest ones have minimal video issues. The other issue is that most default install of Flash etc. till today prefer Gnome, you can do it in KDE but then it would need extra steps for it. Most default Linux installs use Gnome for one reason only, its the stability factor. Of course, those who want the latest will hop for KDE.

[gkweb]

Hello,

quoting myself :
-{ Quote: "
- Compiz very slow when 3D windows effect enabled (not fixed)
" }-

To make Compiz cube rotation a lot smoother, and be able to enable 3D windows effect without sluggishness, I have enabled the "loose binding" Compiz option.

It works great with my NVIDIA card.

Regards,
gkweb.

[Longboard]

Some recent developments with video drivers :( :
Tricky.
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=NzEwMg